What do you guys think of this statement?

[Tabularosa]

I do not think that you can create a truly accurate portrayal of life in a certain time period through literature, movies or anything else unless you have lived through it. Otherwise, it is just your research and readings which boil down to nothing more than hearsay or an opinion of how life was for that particular person.


This statement is not my own, I am just vexed at how to argue against it.

[Admin]

Tom Brokaw's "The Greatest Generation" book wasn't about his own generation and yet he has gotten alot of praise from people of that generation.

[Robert E Lee]

Tom Brokaw's "The Greatest Generation" book wasn't about his own generation and yet he has gotten alot of praise from people of that generation.

Well, it was a shamelessly laudatory work; so even if it presented an inaccurate view of the period, the good ole war veterans weren't about to criticize it.

Anyway, The Greatest Generation wasn't a novel was it?

I knew someone who read it, and she told me it was a load of propaganda.

[imthefoolonthehill]

well, if she has the same blinding mindset as you, I would sooner listen to Joe Millionair trying to teach about nuclear physics.

[Zeno]

I don't agree with that statement easpecially since no one can even agree what a truly accurate portrayle of the present day is. It all depends on your point of view and opinion.

An opposite example is Oliver Stone lived through Vietnam and yet many people don't think Platoon or his book about his experiences are accurate at all, and yet to him they are.

[MarsMonster]

that statement impies that history is mostly incorrect. at least everything that was written by people who didn't live through certain periods. and i think that is true.
and as someone said it all comes down to how the writer sees the period.
also, what IS objective?
how can you describe something as complex as a period of time (millions of people, millions of destinies, events ...) without missing something?

you can go on for days like that

[Shea]

What sort of history are you talking about, Marsmonster? If you stick to straight facts, then history most certainly can be true! But I think the statement is referring more to historical commentaries, novels, or other stories from people who lived during a particular time like Louisa May Alcott or Mark Twain. Anyway, isn't the point of studing history so that we may not make the same mistakes twice (though some people never learn)? If most history isn't true, then why study it?